Looking into a scope for a new 308/6.5cm or prc bolt gun (QC action.) Currently only have the 308, dropping it in an ESS chassis. 1000 yard shooting, hunting, and maybe some NRL hunter in my future. I love the atacr line, I have a 4-16 on another rifle. But it’s pretty much all I know. Have experience with ZCO and vortex razor line, but don’t want to drop the coin on the ZCO atm and don’t want the weight of the razor. I want to branch out just to get some experience behind something other than nightforce, but it often seems like it’s just the right answer. Does anyone have any experience behind both of these who can speak to which would better fit my use case?
- Thread starter Kspence49
- Start date
- Tags
- 308 6.5 nrl hunter optic
I’ve had several 4-16x42 ATACR’s and have the 4-25 S3. I do really like the S3 but IMO the only advantages it has is the glass is a little better, the whole ocular doesn’t rotate with the magnification, and it has a little better FOV and larger looking image in the scope (you see less of the eyepiece edge basically). I also like the reticle much more than anything from NF as far as usability on the low end.
The cons to it is that over 16-18ish the eyebox is tight. There’s some that are fanboys of the scope that will claim it’s not, but I’m not the only one who’s had this complaint about it. It is definitely tight compared to a lot of other optics and any deviation from center in the slightest gets pretty significant image distortion. It’s still usable but you just aren’t going to have a big comfortable eyebox like the NF has. It’s also heavy for its size at almost 37oz and the turrets are big but not too big. If you like the low profile of your NF then these will seem gigantic. The magnification ring also turns the opposite direction of most which is a pretty minor complaint to me and doesn’t bother me but I can see why others may not like it turning the same way as all their other optics.
It’s hard to go wrong with either but there’s pros and cons to both. IMO the 4-16x42 is the best optic that NF makes and is excellent. If you really want to try the S3 though I’d look at the 6-36 even if you don’t need 36x magnification unless you do really need the 4x on the bottom. The 6-36 should have better image qualities on the higher end due to its design and you only give up 2x on the bottom end and a couple more ounces to get it. The 56mm will also have a larger exit pupil at all magnifications.
The cons to it is that over 16-18ish the eyebox is tight. There’s some that are fanboys of the scope that will claim it’s not, but I’m not the only one who’s had this complaint about it. It is definitely tight compared to a lot of other optics and any deviation from center in the slightest gets pretty significant image distortion. It’s still usable but you just aren’t going to have a big comfortable eyebox like the NF has. It’s also heavy for its size at almost 37oz and the turrets are big but not too big. If you like the low profile of your NF then these will seem gigantic. The magnification ring also turns the opposite direction of most which is a pretty minor complaint to me and doesn’t bother me but I can see why others may not like it turning the same way as all their other optics.
It’s hard to go wrong with either but there’s pros and cons to both. IMO the 4-16x42 is the best optic that NF makes and is excellent. If you really want to try the S3 though I’d look at the 6-36 even if you don’t need 36x magnification unless you do really need the 4x on the bottom. The 6-36 should have better image qualities on the higher end due to its design and you only give up 2x on the bottom end and a couple more ounces to get it. The 56mm will also have a larger exit pupil at all magnifications.
Let me know which reticles you are looking at! I will provide you with a discount on each! May help with the decision as well. Just message me
Connor
Get the Zeiss S3. Somebody will always find something to bitch about everything, or think something else is better. That’s why there’s so many options out there.
The Zeiss S3 is a damn solid scope, and the glass is impressive for its price point. Of the 2 options you listed, that’s the direction I’d go.
The Zeiss S3 is a damn solid scope, and the glass is impressive for its price point. Of the 2 options you listed, that’s the direction I’d go.
The glass beats the atacr? Or the price? Would you go for the 4-25 or the 6-36?
Thanks man lots of great info here. Right eye boxes are a pet peeve of mine for sure. I do love my 4-16, but I have a hard time buying two of the same thing
I’ve looked at the 6-36 also, and while it is only about 2oz heavier the length becomes a consideration. I also have a clip on thermal that might suffer at 6x base mag. It’s not the deciding factor tho, if the 6x is objectively better then it’s probably the way to go. The larger objective is nice as well, but on flat tops I tend to gravitate toward smaller objective lenses.I’ve got other optics with large turrets although just by appearances these seem bigger even than the 5-25 atacr line. They do seem a bit bigger than they need to be. And I agree it also seems heavy for what it is, outweighing just about everything but the razor gen 2 in its magnification range.
Do you have any feedback on the low light performance? That’s often a pretty big factor for me when it comes to selection.
I’ve hit the analysis paralysis stage though with selecting an optic for this rifle with all the options out there these days. I unfortunately also don’t live in a location where I can go test things out so it’s all but and try for me.
I think this is kinda similar to the S3 4-25x but lighter with a 30mm tube. Turrets are supposed to be very good.
element-optics.com
Nexus Gen 2 - Element Optics | Premium Riflescopes & Optics
The GEN II takes the DNA of the first generation NEXUS and pushes it to another level with a 4-25x Magnification, a new Turret System and Digital Illum...
element-optics.com The S3 glass is brighter. They’re both a wash as far as clarity. I like the NF Mil-XT reticle better than the ZF-MRi, but both are extremely useable for crossover purposes. Brighter glass lets things pop out at you better while hunting. The Zeiss gets its pedigree from a century of razor-sharp precision German hunting scopes, the NF from 30 years of nearly bombproof tactical scopes that have been in military contacts since nearly the beginning, and for good reason.
If you want a more fair comparison, the 5-25x ATACR and 4-25x S3 are a closer comparison. And the 7-35x ATACR and 6-36x S3.
I have a 5-25x56 ATACR F1 MIL-XT, and an S3 6-36x56 ZF-MRi. Same things I pointed out above were my key notes comparing the 2.
If you want it mostly for hunting, but also some target, the Zeiss is the way to go, IMO. But if you want it mostly for target, with some hunting, the ATACR F1 5-25x, or even the newest generation of Kahles K624i CCW/RSW SKMR4 MIL reticle scope would be an excellent option in that same price range. I have 2 of those K624i scopes as well, and they’re excellent.
My main hunting rifle runs a new Kahles K318i 3.5-18x50 CCW/RSW SKMR3. The field of view and clarity and brightness of the scope are quite amazing. It’s an excellent hunting/crossover scope like you’re looking for. If you can jump into that price range, then I’d recommend this over any of the other options, honestly. It’s got amazing glass, it’s short & compact, and has amazing turrets and tons of internal travel.
Kahles K318i 3.5-18x50 CCW SKMR3 w-right Riflescope 10633
FREE SHIPPING on Kahles K318i 3.5-18x50 CCW SKMR3 w-right Riflescope 10633
Thanks man lots of great info here. Right eye boxes are a pet peeve of mine for sure. I do love my 4-16, but I have a hard time buying two of the same thing
I’ve got other optics with large turrets although just by appearances these seem bigger even than the 5-25 atacr line. They do seem a bit bigger than they need to be. And I agree it also seems heavy for what it is, outweighing just about everything but the razor gen 2 in its magnification range.
Do you have any feedback on the low light performance? That’s often a pretty big factor for me when it comes to selection.
I’ve hit the analysis paralysis stage though with selecting an optic for this rifle with all the options out there these days. I unfortunately also don’t live in a location where I can go test things out so it’s all but and try for me.
If you plan to use it over 16x regularly I would absolutely get the 6-36. If most of your use is below 16 the 4-25 really presents no issue optically.
The turrets are BIG. They aren’t quite trash can status but aren’t far away. They are easy to grab and feel nice though. They really aren’t a problem though unless you want to mount a RDS on the top or WMLRF or something but a WMLRF readout you’d probably be fine with depending on the mount you put it on.
Low light performance is great and the reticle illuminated nicely for that use too. It gets dim enough and only illuminated the center portion unless you turn the brightness way up.
Thanks man lots of great info here. Right eye boxes are a pet peeve of mine for sure. I do love my 4-16, but I have a hard time buying two of the same thing
I’ve got other optics with large turrets although just by appearances these seem bigger even than the 5-25 atacr line. They do seem a bit bigger than they need to be. And I agree it also seems heavy for what it is, outweighing just about everything but the razor gen 2 in its magnification range.
Do you have any feedback on the low light performance? That’s often a pretty big factor for me when it comes to selection.
I’ve hit the analysis paralysis stage though with selecting an optic for this rifle with all the options out there these days. I unfortunately also don’t live in a location where I can go test things out so it’s all but and try for me.
The knobs are not overly large at all. They are actually about the same size as most scopes used in similar ways. Below is a pic of a Steiner, Burris Pro and the Zeiss S3. As you see they are not overly large. Below that is a pic of a Vortex Gen II turret and you can see the size of it. Same with the Kahles above. They are not overly large but large enough to easily be able to grab and spin. The Tract have some tall knobs if you want to see large knobs. LOL
Also I use my 4-25 on my centerfire match rifle and have no issues with the eye box on any power. I have had scopes with tight eye boxes but this isn't one. The 6-36 is a good eye box also for me on my other centerfire match rifle and my .22 match rifle. I really like the Zeiss S3 line. I have three of them now, two 6-36 and a 4-25, and pretty happy with them all. I think you will be happy with them in comparison if you decide to try something different than the NF.
I'd start by looking at the reticles and seeing which one you prefer. Beyond that, figure out if you need higher magnification. They are both pretty nice scopes. I like the more compact design of the 4-16x42 ATACR with zerolock turrets. However, I prefer the S3 mrad reticle to the Nightforce options and Zeiss did a better job with illumination.
If you like the 4-25x50 S3, there are several other scopes on the market that are made by the same OEM that use nearly identical optical system to consider: Tract 4-25x50, Element Nexus Gen2 4-25x50, Revic Acura 5-25x50. Revic is MOA only, unfortunately. I really like their reticle for hunting purposes.
ILya
If you like the 4-25x50 S3, there are several other scopes on the market that are made by the same OEM that use nearly identical optical system to consider: Tract 4-25x50, Element Nexus Gen2 4-25x50, Revic Acura 5-25x50. Revic is MOA only, unfortunately. I really like their reticle for hunting purposes.
ILya
Thanks for the turret pics and comparison Rob, that helps a lot as the scope always seemed to have overly large turrets in most pics. Also, THANK YOU ZEISS for putting large numbers on your big turret!
I have a S3 4-25 on my fancy rimfire. I like it a lot. The glass is nice (depending on who you ask it is very close to or beating the Razer G3 6-36), the reticle is pleasant to use, and it has a huge elevation to allow me to dial beyond 500 yards with my rimfire.
No problem. It's always good to have pics to put it in perspective. And yes the large numbers are very nice. That gets overlooked a lot.
Between the 2, ATACR to do it all. Though the Zeiss is very good.
